Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
What's astonishing about this subject is how our collection of so-called "AP's" accept that a player can win by quitting while ahead on "negative EV" games even at 99.7% or whatever, yet for some very odd reason, that cannot happen and is not allowed to happen over and over and over again--and in the same breath utter how you absolutely CAN win by quitting while ahead on a 100.5% game....a mere .8% theoretically better than the other game. And all this belief, during a simple few minutes or several hours session.
In a scenario where someone plays a single denomination on a -EV game all year or decade long with no particular strategy other than optimal, I give very little hope to coming out ahead at the end of that term. But is .8% or even 1.5% gonna make any real difference on the "quitting when ahead" mantra? Of course not. That tiny difference in any one session where goals are pre-set might allow one or two sessions to be turned around, but all this nonsense that -EV HAS to yield an overall loser but +EV HAS to yield a winner or has any real difference-maker attached, is 100% crap.
But enter a strategy such as SPS, where it is specifically designed to create individual winning sessions, time after time. That's why people hate me, and that's why arci has been on such an anxiety trip for all these years, enough so that he lost track of the needs of the missus. This is not anything so special that the regular folk would never understand. The unintended consequences, however, has been the know-it-all crowd not wanting to be able to understand it along with being afraid to try it for fear their sacred vp beliefs might wind up in just another heap. Keep applying long term rules to short term play and you will continue the need to scratch your head while needing to criticize those who have the abilities and vision you never had.